User talk:Vsmith

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please note - rules of the game! I usually answer comments & questions on this page rather than on your talk (unless initiated there) to keep the conversation thread together. I am aware that some wikiers do things differently so let me know if you expect a reply on your page and maybe it'll happen :-)

Contents

[edit] Archives


[edit] A DB-Nonsense Article....

Hello Vsmith, this db-nonsense article is highly inappropriate and still has not been removed yet. Could you take a look at it please? Thank you.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 15:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Done, gone. Vsmith 15:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The recently added "Analysis section" in the Combustion article

Hello:

I feel that the entire new "Analyis section" is just a jumble of data graphs with no explanations and no references. I think it should be deleted until the editor-author:

  • Reduces all the white space in each of the images and frames them so that at least some of them could be placed two abreast.
  • Uses a more easily legible text in the images.. Some of the text is so small, that it is difficult to read.
  • Converts the images from .gif format to .png format.
  • Adds some discussion of and explanation of the various images, as well as references to the source of the data.

Much of that data (for example, the enthalpy versus temperature graph and the two heating value plots) is readily available it the NIST online website as well as in many textbooks and handbooks.

What do you think? Please commenton the Talk:Combustion page. - mbeychok 06:07, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Update ...

Hi there:

I am new to Wikipedia and its environment.

Thanks for creating a work area for me.

I have to admit that in a hurry I tried to contribute to the Combustion area.

I have started reworking my original input. This time I will go with tables instead of plots -- more efficient and less time consuming.

At this point, I need to add more text to it.

When I get done, I will ask you to take a look at it before I try to get it moved back to the Combustion area.

Thanks,

Gordan -- Engware 05:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC)Engware

[edit] Einstein Edits

Alright, let me explain to you the logic of this, when it comes to flow of article.

I agree that embellishment and such should have no place in scientific articles in general, however I disagree with your ideas here.

You are being narrow minded. Read the 2 paragraphs pertaining to his education and performance in school. The reason why I included the additional information is to end that section with "Einstein only excelled in the subjects he deemed relevant to his scientific career."

This is THE TRUTH. Alright, i can take out the "presume" and "deduce" bit, if need be, however, I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT THIS VITAL INFORMATION AS TO THE thinking of Albert Einstein, or his perception of education in general as a reflection of his own experiences through high school, is VERY IMPORTANT AND RELEVANT to this article. It's not just the flow of the entire paragraph, its a concluding sentence, which is important in any academic essay.

I am not sure about your level of understanding of these subtle ideas. But JUST FOR YOU, i will take out the "presume" and "deduce" bit, even though it is blatantly obvious, I was being pragmatic by using those 2 verbs to suggest that there might have been more to Einstein than what's on paper.

Fine, i'll take it out, but I am going to include the concluding sentence, and if you still have a problem with it, let's take it up with higher personell.

Regards, --Emperor 03:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Emperor ?? where'd that come from? OK Peter (as you first signed the above post), but I'd suggest taking the issue to the Einstein talk page rather than some higher personell - whoever you're referring to there. As I obviously cannot argue with THE TRUTH with my limited level of understanding of these subtle ideas.
"Einstein only excelled in the subjects he deemed relevant to his scientific career." -- hmm, or was he more normal and excelled in subjects that he was interested in? Do we have a reference that states his career oriented focus? or just that he was following his interests as many very bright teens have done throughout history. Vsmith 03:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Copying this to talk:Albert Einstein - please respond there wher all of the higher personell guys can watch. Vsmith 03:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


The key idea here, is this "Let us return to Nature, which upholds the principle of getting the maximum amount of effect from the minimum effort, whereas the matriculation test does exactly the opposite." Einstein clearly emphasizes how "Nature", (as in, Natural Sciences), is what is important (and relevant for his career), and even goes so far as to say that other courses should be abolished, as their use is limited. Not only do i partially agree with him, but this is clearly far deeper than the "average" half-wit who just wants to study what interests him. Einstein is a deep man and that quote clearly shows it. You can sit there philosophizing all you want. But if you want to be a philosopher, move away from Science. Philosophers aren't Scientists, and as Einstein would say, should be abolished. ;-)

As far as I am concerned, this topic is closed. There is only so much time I can invest on what seems to be a minor malfunction.

I wish you a good day, sir. --Emperor 04:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... now you are insulting my bright teen students - they are not "average" half-wits, so why do you want to pass blanket judgement on these potential future science geniuses. They are the future.
As for your key issue quote - that quote dates from ~1920, long after the fact, and does not support your relevant for his career bit as a bright teen 20+ years previously.
Who's philosophizing?
Vsmith 15:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] removal of my addition to the article on Banded Iron Formations

Hello, You removed a valuable detail about how the Earth came to be as it now is. The thing is you have at this time no mention of the process that starts as magma and results in landmass,calcite,BIF & other details about the surface of Earth now being studied. You say there are some errors in my statement and that I won't argue about except to say you statement also has error as I'm sure you will also admit. Where do you think all the CO2 not locked up in rocks came from? The major factor that changed during the past 4by is the locking up of CO2 by chemical reactions. Nothing else is on the scale of this single process. The evolution of the biosphere is a direct of this process. The rise of the landmass is a result of this process. Anyway, if you would be so inclined, it would be helpful if you pointed out the errors in my addition. thanks, Jim —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jimhmeyer (talk • contribs) 00:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Hi Jim, I've replied on Talk:Banded iron formation. Vsmith 02:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] venus prokaryotes

why did you erase my contribution about prokarite like organisms on venus in the prokaryote article ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Crocadog (talk • contribs) 02:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

The bit removed:
And also two scientists at the university of texas suggested that some levels of the atmosphere of venus may be hospitable for prokaryote like organisims to exist and evolve.
Seems:
  1. that it is seriously in need of a source or published reference.
  2. - what two scientists and how about capitalizing, that would make it more "respectable" and less prone to reverting.
  3. - "some levels", how about a bit more specificity?
Now, if you care to clean it up and provide a verifiable reference, I'd say you will be most welcome to add the information into that section of the article as a separate paragraph following the Martian bit. If you need help with formatting the reference, just ask. Cheers, Vsmith 02:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edits by anon 80.202.86.152

I really dont see what i have done wrong... I have only posted facts on this site, so please inform me about what I did wrong.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.202.86.152 (talk • contribs) 03:12, 10 December 2006.

sorry i didnt realise that I was logged off, but I still want to know what I have done wrong, as I said: I have only posted facts on this site.

Can you see my user-Id now? Christian0907 03:25, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

The edit that resulted in my note to the anon ip can be seen here: [1]. I'd say that was vandalism by anon 80.202.86.152. Wouldn't you agree? Also, when I look at your edit history - the only edits I see are to this talk page. Now, I'm going to assume good faith on your part, but the only prior edits from that ip were vandalism about 45 minutes prior to your question here and you seem to be quite familiar with wiki editing considering your first edit was only about 15 minutes ago. Vsmith 03:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] uh

someone already called me on that... maybe you should try looking at new things rather than last week's news

[edit] Geology of the Rocky Mountains

Hi, Vsmith. Thanks for the correction -- I'm cobbling together info from multiple sources (including other WP articles), and I'm not 100% sure they are all correct. If you see anything else weird in the article (or if you'd like to add more information), I would appreciate you adding your expertise. Thanks! hike395 18:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for cleaning up 65.110.174.133 spam

Was just about to launch into this and was glad to see you had already cleaned up this user's spam. Keep up the good work! Calltech 20:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, it's an ongoing challenge. Cheers! Vsmith 16:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Addition of two books to Mississippi River Content Page

Dear Mr. Smith,

What would constitute a non-spam listing of two new books about the Mississippi River: 1) Dreaming the Mississippi by Katherine Fischer and 2) Treasures of the Mississippi: Panoramas and Poetic Reflections by Dr. Abdul K. Sinno. May I include these books under the references section without external links to their websites? There are more books on the Mississippi River; however, I only see two books listed in the WIKI at this point in time.

Second, I see links to two external sites regarding the Mississippi River. As the editor, would you please provide me with some guidelines regarding how you determine what sites can or cannot be included?

Best Regards,

Rafic

user id: Raficsinno

Hi, the links I removed qualified as spam in my view. The book listing of itself would probably been accepted, however the addition of a promotional weblink selling the book made it spam. The external link removed seems to be a commercial site providing panorama images for sale, as such it is definitely spam. Now, if you have no connection to the book, there is probably no problem with adding a simple link to it However this is an encyclopedia, our job is to add content, not just to add your favorite weblinks or to promote a book which may or may not be relevant to the article content. Cheers, Vsmith 16:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your feedback. Would I be allowed to add both books mentioned above without links to their respective websites? For other books about the Mississippi River, what procedure should I follow in submitting information to the Mississippi River WIKI? Is there a way to send the information to you for review prior to posting the information on the WIKI? My intention is to post qualified and applicable information not to spam, so any guidance you could provide would be helpful. Best Regards, Rafic.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.214.11.150 (talk • contribs) 21:16, 13 December 2006.
Please add content rather than just listing a book as further reading. If you have information missing in the article, please feel free to add it along with a reference to support the material added. If you are uncertain about the information or about your writing skills - then you could place the information on the talk page of the article ask for input from other editors there. I am an admin, but no one owns any page. My main input into the page has been reverting vandalism, etc. - I caught your aparant spam simply because the page is on my watchlist (along with some 5000 other pages), So, jump in and add to the article - just don't be over-offended if some other editor adds minor to drastic modification. If your information is sourced and notable it should survive the scrutiny of the other editors there. Enjoy, Vsmith 23:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to respond. As far as spam is concerned, we are strong opponents to spamming in any form. Would you please let me know (privately) what "watch list" the site is on as there is a possibility that the web address might be spoofed. My intention in linking the site to the WIKI was to share panoramic views of the Mississippi River. I apologize as I would have never attempted to even link the site in the first place knowing what I now know of your definition of spam. Please know, I respect your views regarding this issue. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Raficsinno (talk • contribs) 05:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC).
Er... nothing mysterious about that watchlist, you can have one too. When you save an edit (while logged in) just check that "Watch this page" box before you save an edit and walla you have a watchlist. Look up top and there, between "My preferences" and "My contributions" is your watchlist. Just an easy way to keep track of Wikipedia articles you are interested in. Also, you can sign your edits to talk pages by just typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your edit. Cheers, Vsmith 23:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Clear enough. Thank you for the information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.214.11.150 (talk) 02:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Why do you hate me?

Why do you hate this IP Adress I'm trying to edit incorrect articles and I'm get blocked. SO I repeat why do you hate me?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by KyleLent (talk • contribs) 17:44, 13 December 2006.
No hate involved - no clue what IP you refer to. I see no problem, simply log in and an ip block shouldn't affect you. Cheers, Vsmith 23:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help with 3RR violator

I see that you blocked IP 68.94.203.13 for 3RR violations last week. The user is still deleting content from the page List of pseudosciences and pseudoscientific concepts without discussing it on the talk page and reverting repeatedly. I don't know how to fill out the 3RR violation form at the admin noticeboard and am wondering if you might be able to help. MKoltnow 20:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Just an update: we have a report now. — coelacan talk — 21:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
And that has been dealt with by WMC. Gee - Wikipedia rolls on even when I'm offline :-) Vsmith 23:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Aye, sorry for not being clearer, my intention was to let you know that you didn't have to deal with it yourself. Peace, — coelacan talk — 18:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

im sorry :(

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.109.214.202 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 14 December 2006.
OK, apology accepted. Be good now :-) Vsmith 00:07, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Mormons4Justice is an investigative journal. Non-profit, not interested in money. The stories are documented and relate to the areas that are linked.

Hope this helps.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mormons4Justice (talk • contribs) 01:25, 15 December 2006.
Thanks, but -- adding links to your own website is considered spam whether or not it is for profit. Please read WP:SPAM and WP:COI carefully. Vsmith 01:35, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] George W. Bush revert

Thanks for moving it. I tried to revert the vandalism by Railer 760, but my revert didn't move the page back to George W. Bush. The tag that you used, is that only for admins or can anyone use it? Valley2city 01:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

To move a page back over an existing page (in this case a redirect made by the previous move) requires the deletion of that previous page. Page deletion normaly requires admin capabilities although in this case there was no second step to delete the redir so you probably could have just moved it back. I haven't had to do that much so am not sure of the details. Seems that the page should be protected against such moves. Thanks for your vigilance and efforts. Vsmith 01:57, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] admin

how do you become an admin? i am finding so much vandalism...

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bkrasner (talk • contribs) 18:34, 15 December 2006.
Hi - you don't have to be an admin to revert vandalism. If you are interested in becomming an administrator - simply make good solid edits, engage in talk page discussions, be civil at all times, learn the ropes - that is study and become familiar with the various Wiki policy pages and ... after 6 to 12 months and a few thousand good edits you may be nominated for adminship or nominate yourself when you feel ready. The community then scrutinizes your edit history and interactive behavior and votes either for or against. For now just watch for vandalism & revert it - place warings on vandal talk pages and enjoy adding content to Wikipedia. Cheers, Vsmith 00:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Water Vapor Article

Hey, I know you do a lot of editing on the Water vapor article, if you have any good article references could you put them in sections that need it? Thanks, Hard Raspy Sci 14:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../v/s/m/User_talk%7EVsmith_b770.html"